Contemplating the expansion of Heathrow at such a time when the world grapples with devastating climate crises seems quite unfathomable (as noted in “Scepticism in Whitehall that Heathrow plan can be reconciled with climate targets,” dated January 29). I’ve stood by Labour among family and friends who feel let down by Rachel Reeves’ decision not to impose fairer taxes on the super-rich to bolster essential services gutted by conservative policies.
This plan for Heathrow’s expansion is undeniably misaligned with our environmental obligations and significantly betrays Labour’s campaign commitments to preserve the planet. The party risks substantial damage from this course of action.
Air travel is a significant source of pollution, yet we continue to neglect increasing taxes on flights and discouraging this mode of transport. Particularly, private jets should be completely off the table.
Sadiq Khan has made tough calls to mitigate London’s pollution, facing considerable backlash in the process. Yet, this is what moral leadership entails, and these efforts could be completely undermined by this recent decision. – Cass Witcombe, London
Having contributed to both the third runway at Heathrow and the HS2, I’m well aware of the hurdles that Rachel Reeves will encounter in translating her intents into actionable results. Achieving success requires three key elements: clarity regarding each project’s intent and impact on the nation as a whole; a detailed, comprehensive government plan to not only articulate these benefits but evolve them over time; and the tenacity to navigate through the inevitable challenges of delivery.
In past efforts at Heathrow and with HS2, we collectively missed those marks. However, my involvement in the Northern Ireland peace process demonstrated that with the right focus and determination, governmental success is achievable. Such outcomes are only possible with persistent, clear, and decisive leadership from the top. That’s the real forthcoming test. – Tom Kelly, Aghadowey, Coleraine
What exactly is the economic growth the chancellor is targeting, and for whose benefit? As seen in “Reeves plans to create ‘Silicon Valley’ between Oxford and Cambridge,” dated January 28, real growth is found in life’s smaller details.
Instead of pursuing remote and expensive projects that might prove economically futile and are undoubtedly harmful to the environment, people need visible improvements that enrich their daily lives.
Think more workers cleaning up our streets, investing in local libraries and museums, reopening community and youth centers, and restoring park keeper positions. Such investments boost job creation and generate tax revenue. It’s perplexing how government often overlooks these simple, beneficial opportunities, while guardians of public welfare frequently become scapegoats for being perceived barriers to “progress.” – Karin Hessenberg and Robin Parrish, Sheffield
In 1948, despite the financial hardship post-war, a Labour government successfully passed the National Assistance Act, birthing the National Health Service. David Kynaston’s extensive works on this period, “Austerity Britain 1945-51,” quotes Clement Attlee declaring that social services must be funded somehow, emphasizing that only “higher output can provide the necessities we all seek.” Rachel Reeves inherits this compelling argument from Attlee’s era, countering any suggestion that she merely seeks “growth for growth’s sake,” as a Greenpeace spokesman implied in your article. – Dr. Nick McAdoo, London
Rachel Reeves needs to redefine the concept of “growth.” Unlike the US, we lack vast lands for server farms. Tourists flock to Oxford and Cambridge for their heritage and landscapes, not to witness tech infrastructure. Similarly, East Anglia’s visitors cherish its beaches and wildlife, not nuclear power sites.
Our island’s strengths lie in resilience, innovation, and creativity, which should be our rallying point in leading green technology initiatives. Let’s harness nature to combat climate change, capitalizing on our natural resources if only political resolve aligns. Rethink, Chancellor. – Vanessa Raison, London
As I perused reports on Labour’s proposed infrastructure projects, notably the Heathrow expansion, aimed at fostering “growth” (referencing “Legal challenges to infrastructure plans to be blocked in Starmer growth push,” January 23), it struck me that these initiatives seem southeast-centric. Might I remind Rachel Reeves of the pressing investment needs in other regions?
For instance, my locale still awaits the new hospital promised at the end of the New Labour era to replace the deteriorating University Hospital of North Tees. Proposals like a new crossing for the River Tees and a dual carriageway upgrade to the A1 towards Edinburgh were made, yet remain unfulfilled. – Andrew Lonsdale, Stockton-on-Tees, County Durham
Referring to the January 29 edition wherein your front-page featured “Reeves pledges to create ‘Europe’s Silicon Valley’ in push for growth,” and on page 19 noted, “Only Scotland is set to curb child poverty in UK, charity report finds,” should spotlight the need for equality over mere growth. – Jenny Moir, Chelmsford
If you have thoughts on anything featured today in the Guardian, feel free to email your letters for potential publication.
